4 ms·

I think you have misread me. And while my knee-jerk reaction was to meet snark with snark, I shall resist the temptation. If none of your software has ever read

by donaq 16y ago

I think you have misread me. And while my knee-jerk reaction was to meet snark with snark, I shall resist the temptation. If none of your software has ever read from or written to a source of persistent data, I think you should be concerned. :)

kranner 16y ago
Plain old files are perfectly valid sources and sinks for persistent data, if you don't need all the other features of a database.
- philipkimmey 16y ago
  I interned this summer in a genetics lab, and was shocked the extent to which this is the case. Both the input and output files are absurdly huge, so I'm not sure anything else would've been viable, but still, at least as a student it always seemed like there should be "some other way." After a week or two of getting to know the system, for clarification I asked: "You mean this entire sophisticated system is just some Perl, with a database that keeps track of the flat files?"
  - protomyth 16y ago
    A lot of companies still do all the processing on text files as a nightly run (particularly those companies getting once a day data files (e.g. credit card rewards processors)). Some put it in an actual database, but you can really churn through text files faster than a lot of relational databases can do their queries. The most interesting example I saw of this was a company that had an automated process to add a header with time/date/source and check it into code control (subversion I think). The nightly batch job checked what it needed out and did all the processing including generating some control spreadsheets.
RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
My comment wasn't intended to be snarky, but when someone questions my credentials, albeit inadvertantly and through ignorance, I find it a little hard to be entirely objective. I do read and write persistent data stores, I've just never had to use SQL or a relational database. I've just gone and looked it up. I do know the concepts of inner, outer, left and right joins, and I use similar constructions every day. But this is counter-productive. I've made my point that there are areas of programming that don't use SQL or relational-databases or web technologies. Making sweeping statements about the competence of programmers based on their knowledge of technologies they don't use is blinkered. Yes, programmers who work in web development most likely should know about databases and HTML. If they don't, then they are most likely either inexperienced or limited in their capabilities. It may yet be that the code they write is clear, clean, well-designed and bug-free, but databases and HTML are strongly correlated with productivity in this field.
- donaq 16y ago
  My comment wasn't intended to be snarky, but when someone questions my credentials, albeit inadvertantly and through ignorance, I find it a little hard to be entirely objective. Huh. Well, you've been programming for longer than I've been alive, so you're almost certainly a better programmer than I am.
  - RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
    I suspect that largely we've been talking (arguing?) past each other. My point was/is that there are areas of programming that really, really don't need SQL or relational databases, and don't touch web interfaces. I've just been talking with a friend who does financial simulations as well, and he's heard of joins, but never used them. He's also never written HTML, but has got a clue about it. There are also many programmers out there who claim 30 years of experiences, but who actually have 1 year of experience 30 times over. At its heart I think we'd all agree that narrow definitions and narrow judgements don't do anyone much good. There are more programmers than just web programmers, or embedded programmers, or kernel programmers, or simulation programmers, etc. We should all do each other the courtesy of recognising each others' skills and knowledge.
    - donaq 16y ago
      We have definitely been talking past each other. Mostly because we understand the term "database" differently (see my other reply to you). I am actually mostly in agreement with you, since I don't do that much web development these days either. And narrow judgements may not do anyone good, but I think precise definitions would have helped us in this case. :)
      - hugh3 16y ago
        I've never done "database" stuff either, but I've "read from persistent data sources" (Fortran formatted read ftw). But if I tried to claim this counted as "database experience" on a job application I don't think many people would agree.

by donaq 16y ago

kranner 16y ago

Plain old files are perfectly valid sources and sinks for persistent data, if you don't need all the other features of a database.

philipkimmey 16y ago
I interned this summer in a genetics lab, and was shocked the extent to which this is the case. Both the input and output files are absurdly huge, so I'm not sure anything else would've been viable, but still, at least as a student it always seemed like there should be "some other way." After a week or two of getting to know the system, for clarification I asked: "You mean this entire sophisticated system is just some Perl, with a database that keeps track of the flat files?"
- protomyth 16y ago
  A lot of companies still do all the processing on text files as a nightly run (particularly those companies getting once a day data files (e.g. credit card rewards processors)). Some put it in an actual database, but you can really churn through text files faster than a lot of relational databases can do their queries. The most interesting example I saw of this was a company that had an automated process to add a header with time/date/source and check it into code control (subversion I think). The nightly batch job checked what it needed out and did all the processing including generating some control spreadsheets.

RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago

My comment wasn't intended to be snarky, but when someone questions my credentials, albeit inadvertantly and through ignorance, I find it a little hard to be entirely objective. I do read and write persistent data stores, I've just never had to use SQL or a relational database. I've just gone and looked it up. I do know the concepts of inner, outer, left and right joins, and I use similar constructions every day. But this is counter-productive. I've made my point that there are areas of programming that don't use SQL or relational-databases or web technologies. Making sweeping statements about the competence of programmers based on their knowledge of technologies they don't use is blinkered. Yes, programmers who work in web development most likely should know about databases and HTML. If they don't, then they are most likely either inexperienced or limited in their capabilities. It may yet be that the code they write is clear, clean, well-designed and bug-free, but databases and HTML are strongly correlated with productivity in this field.

donaq 16y ago
My comment wasn't intended to be snarky, but when someone questions my credentials, albeit inadvertantly and through ignorance, I find it a little hard to be entirely objective. Huh. Well, you've been programming for longer than I've been alive, so you're almost certainly a better programmer than I am.
- RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
  I suspect that largely we've been talking (arguing?) past each other. My point was/is that there are areas of programming that really, really don't need SQL or relational databases, and don't touch web interfaces. I've just been talking with a friend who does financial simulations as well, and he's heard of joins, but never used them. He's also never written HTML, but has got a clue about it. There are also many programmers out there who claim 30 years of experiences, but who actually have 1 year of experience 30 times over. At its heart I think we'd all agree that narrow definitions and narrow judgements don't do anyone much good. There are more programmers than just web programmers, or embedded programmers, or kernel programmers, or simulation programmers, etc. We should all do each other the courtesy of recognising each others' skills and knowledge.
  - donaq 16y ago
    We have definitely been talking past each other. Mostly because we understand the term "database" differently (see my other reply to you). I am actually mostly in agreement with you, since I don't do that much web development these days either. And narrow judgements may not do anyone good, but I think precise definitions would have helped us in this case. :)
    - hugh3 16y ago
      I've never done "database" stuff either, but I've "read from persistent data sources" (Fortran formatted read ftw). But if I tried to claim this counted as "database experience" on a job application I don't think many people would agree.